What were Parnell’s strengths and weaknesses as a political leader?
“The uncrowned King of Ireland’ is a suitable title for Parnell as a leader. He was ‘king’ of many political talents. A
tactician, a manipulator, an idol, Parnell attracted attention through the use of parliamentary obstructionism in the
British Parliament. As an MP for Meath, his charisma, intelligence and ambition made him a highly regarded politician.
At the death of Isaac Butt in 1879, Parnell was the obvious candidate to lead the Home Rule Party. At its helm, Parnell
made crucial decisions which lead to great success. Yet, it was his personal weaknesses that lead to the ultimate
downfall of the ‘Chief’.
As a political leader, Parnell strived for Home Rule for Ireland, yet the early years of his political career were focused on
the increasing demand for a solution to the Land Question. He showed skill in organisation when he together with
Davitt, moved to implement the New Departure, which required the co-operation of the Physical Force Nationalists and
the Constitutional Nationalists. In 1879 Parnell established the Irish National Land League and again his excellent
rhetorical and organisational skills brought the Land Question to the forefront of Irish politics. His charismatic speechmaking proved vital in securing the support of the diverse strands of Irish nationalism and in securing his position as a
nationalist icon. “Keep a firm grip on your homesteads and lands. You most allow yourselves to be dispossessed as you
were dispossessed in 1847”. These words stimulated resilience and pride among the tenant farmers and were printed in
newspapers which furthered his appeal and increased his support base in an increasingly literate Ireland, England and
America. He also embarked on a successful fundraising tour of America in 1880 during which he collected £70,000 for
famine relief and for the Land League. Parnell expertly utilised the Land League as a medium for increasing his
popularity, and by 1880 he was widely recognised as the leader of Irish nationalism.
One of Parnell’s most significant strengths as a political leader was his talent for strategy and tactics. These were of
enormous benefit during the Land War. He did not want to alienate his moderate supporters but he also wanted to
maintain the support of the significant Fenian presence in Ireland. One of his most successful strategies was his proposal
of Boycotting as an alternative to agrarian violence. This tactical expertise was further in evidence in his response to
Gladstone’s Second Land Act in 1880. It represented the ‘Conciliation’ in the Liberal Government’s response to the Land
War, ‘Coercion and Conciliation’, and introduced a form of dual ownership. While the Act was broadly welcomed by
Parnell’s moderate supporters, there were many critics of the Act among the Land League and the Fenians in Ireland
particularly because it excluded tenants who had no written agreements with their landlords and it did not extend to
tenants in arrears. It did not concede the Land league’s basic demand: the abolition of Landlordism. Parnell’s skill as a
strategist was in evidence when he found a solution to satisfy both sides. He instructed the Home Rule Party to abstain
on voting for the Bill and called Convention of the Land League in Dublin which decided to wait and test individual cases
in the Land Court. Parnell appealed to his more extreme supporters by orchestrating his arrest. After his arrest he
displayed great leadership skills when he issued the No Rent Manifesto, and forcing Gladstone to consider a
compromise to prevent an escalation of agrarian violence: Captain Moonlight. Parnell’s tactical skill culminated in the
Kilmainham Treaty in 1882 which extended the benefits of the Land Act to include tenants in arrears and leaseholders.
This effectively brought the land War to an end. It was a turning point in the Land Question and in Parnell’s career; he
could now focus on his main political ambition: Home Rule.
After the murder of the new Irish Viceroy, Lord Cavendish by the Invincibles in an incident that became known as the
Phoenix Park murders, Parnell was able to cut ties with the Fenians and commit himself entirely to legitimate
constitutional politics. Perhaps Parnell’s greatest strength was his effective organisational skills which he employed to
consolidate the Home Rule Party. Under the leadership of Isaac Butt the party was in disarray, lacked leadership,
discipline and focus. Under Parnell the Irish National League was formed to take the place of the Land League, and was
controlled from the centre by Parnell and proved an important vehicle for consolidating support and fundraising. Parnell
also gained the support of the powerful Catholic Church. His leadership and control of the party was strengthened when
he imposed strict rules regarding discipline. Each candidate for election had to take the Party Pledge. He renamed the
Party, the Irish Parliamentary Party (IPP) and the new title encapsulated the political drive and authority he wanted to
achieve. In the years before the 1885 general election Parnell was instrumental in the passing of several reform acts to
benefit the Irish people including the “Labourers’ Dwelling Act” and the Tramways Act. The Third Reform Act in 1884
was also significant in that it broadened the franchise to include more Irish voters who would vote for the IPP. This,
together with the consolidation of his party and the concentrated electioneering campaign in Ireland in 1885, gave
Parnell a significant advantage in the general election of that year. He would hold the balance of power Parliament.
Parnell strengths as a political leader were highlighted during the elections of 1885 and 1886. He excelled in the
manipulative game of chess by pitting the Liberals and Conservatives against one another in an attempt to gain IPP
support. He influenced the Tories in introducing the Ashbourne Land Act, dropping coercion and appointing a new
Viceroy to Ireland, Lord Carnarvon, who was believed to be sympathetic to Home Rule.
Parnell was savvy and understood that Conservative support would mean that Rule would have a better chance of
proceeding though the House of Lords. Because he thought that the Liberals would win more seats than the
Conservatives, he set out to redress the balance and in his “Manifesto to the Irish Electors in Great Britain” he advised
the Irish people living in Britain to vote for the Conservatives. Parnell’s constant display of charisma and leadership
resulted in the Home Rule Party winning 85 seats. The Conservatives 249 seats and the Liberals 335 seats meant that
The IPP would be of little benefit to the Conservatives. The liberals, on the other hand, could form a stable government
by allying with the IPP. But after the Liberal’s coercive policies in Ireland, Parnell made it known that support would
come at a high price: nothing short of Home Rule. When Parnell entered into the Liberal Alliance, Gladstone proposed
the First Home Rule Bill in 1886. Home Rule was for the first time a feasible reality. This is perhaps Parnell’s greatest
achievement.
After the rejection of the First Home Rule Bill and the success of the Conservatives in the 1886 general election, Parnell
was not disheartened. His optimism was based on the hopeful prospect that Gladstone, whom he had now converted to
Home Rule, would be re-elected. Due to Parnell’s excellent leadership qualities, determination and strategic excellence,
the Home Rule Party was in its strongest position yet.
Despite his long list of strengths, Parnell also had weaknesses as a political leader, namely his pride. In November 1890
he was found to be the guilty party in the divorce case of Katherine and Captain William O’Shea. Enemies of Parnell
launched a smear campaign and portrayed him as a marriage-wrecker. His once powerful allies, Gladstone and the
Catholic Church called for Parnell’s resignation. The meeting of the IPP in Committee Room 15 in December 1890
resulted in a walkout of 54 Anti-Parnellites including Michael Davitt and William O’Brien. He was left with only 31
Parnellite followers. His refusal to put his leadership to the vote and his inability to put the needs of his party above his
personal pride was perhaps his greatest weakness.
During 1891 Parnell fought many by-elections against Anti-Parnellites. The stress and pressure of the divisions within a
once strong, unified, disciplined party proved too much for Parnell. On October 6th 1891, Parnell died of exhaustion and
illness. It was just four months after his marriage to Kitty O’Shea and he was only 45 years of age.
Parnell’s strengths as a leader cemented the Irish Home Rule question in British politics. The tragic demise of a much
admired leader, who left behind a deeply divided party, disillusioned many young Irish people who lost faith in the
parliamentary process. He did however provide a focus for the various disparate strands of Irish nationalism many of
whom continued to strive for what John Daly once identified as “The Land of Ireland for the people of Ireland.”
You are the corrector: Read the essay written by Claire Joyce and correct it according to the Marking Scheme
below: When you arrive at a mark write a detailed examiners comment explaining exactly why you awarded
this mark.
Essay = 100 marks
(CM) = 60 marks for Historical Content (accurate and relevant to the question asked)
(OE) = 40 marks for Overall Evaluation (the quality of the answer in the context of the set question)
Step 1: Divide the answer into paragraphs or paragraph equivalents






A relevant introduction - background and/or defining the question and explaining the approach;
An episode, phase or stage in a sequence of events;
An aspect of a topic/issue, with supporting factual references;
A point in an argument or discussion, with supporting factual references;
An explanation of a concept or term, with supporting factual references;
A good concluding paragraph or summation, which is not mere repetition
Step 2: Award marks to each paragraph or paragraph equivalent as follows
MARKS
IMPRESSION
EXPLANATON
11-12 marks
Excellent
8-10 marks
Very good
Outstanding piece of analysis, exposition or commentary.
Clearly expressed, accurate and substantial information.
Very good material, accurately and clearly expressed.
6-7 marks
Good:
Worthwhile information, reasonably well expressed.
3-5 marks
Fair
Limited information/barely stated.
0-2 marks
Poor
Trivial/irrelevant/grave errors.
Step 3: Award an Overall Evaluation (OE) (Maximum = 40 marks) based on:
MARKS
IMPRESSION EXLANATION
34-40 marks
Excellent
:
Excellent in its treatment of the set question, particularly if it shows detailed
learning, wide reading, analysis or extensive coverage.
28-33 marks
Very
good
Very good – but not excellent - in its treatment of the set question, ie: accurate and
substantial.
22-27marks
Good:
16-21 marks
Fair:
10-15 marks
Weak:
Good standard treatment of the set question, without being exceptional in the
information or the commentary supplied.
Fair attempt at the set question, but has identifiable defects, eg: incomplete
coverage, irrelevant data, factual inaccuracies.
Poor, in that it fails to answer the question as set, but has some merit.
0-9 marks
Very
weak:
Very poor answer which, at best, offers only scraps of information.
Step 4: Add up the Marks and arrive at a mark out of 100: